Re: disjointness of numerics

On 21 Jan 2009, at 16:42, Michael Schneider wrote:
[snip]
> I am not sure about the situation in OWL 1. Both datatypes,  
> xsd:decimal and
> xsd:double, were not required to be supported, AFAIU. I would guess  
> that
> there is some chance that at least /some/ existing OWL 1 DL  
> reasoners will
> draw the first conclusion,

Yes, but, arguably, erroneously as they types are disjoint in XML  
Schema.

> since the two datatypes are pretty common. But I
> believe that this would then be a proprietary extension w.r.t. the  
> OWL 1
> spec (though this extension would not be in conflict with OWL 1 DL).

They are permitted in OWL 1, so it's unclear that one should consider  
it proprietary. Varying from Schema might be considered such.

> Anyone having better information? (E.g., did old versions of Pellet  
> draw the
> first conclusion?)

No, due to disjointness.

Cheers,
Bijan.